An Act Concerning Expenditures Of State Agencies Providing Social Services.
Impact
If enacted, SB01123 is expected to have a significant influence on how social services are delivered by state agencies. The bill stipulates that the Secretary must evaluate not only the financial expenditure of each program but also its relevance to the beneficiaries. These evaluations will culminate in findings and recommendations to the legislative appropriations committee by January 1, 2016, potentially leading to shifts in funding and resources allocated to various programs based on their assessed effectiveness.
Summary
SB01123, titled 'An Act Concerning Expenditures Of State Agencies Providing Social Services,' aims to enhance fiscal accountability and efficiency within state-funded social service programs. The bill mandates a comprehensive review by the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management to assess the cost-effectiveness and overall impact of social service programs administered by state agencies. The intent is to ensure that these programs not only meet the needs of the residents but also provide a clear picture of potential overlaps with federal, local, or private services that recipients may access.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SB01123 appears to skew favorably among legislators who advocate for more disciplined budgeting and increased accountability for social services. However, there may be apprehensions, particularly from those who worry that rigorous cutbacks could jeopardize essential services. The push for reviews stems from an overarching desire to optimize resource utilization, but the practical implications of potential program eliminations could raise concerns about the safety net for vulnerable populations.
Contention
Despite the overall support for the bill's intent, notable points of contention may arise regarding the specifics of which programs will potentially be cut or phased out following the review. Stakeholders are likely to engage in discussions about the adequacy of funding for social services and the implications of removing programs. As evaluations are based on effectiveness and cost, there may be fears among advocates that critical but less 'efficient' programs could face elimination despite their importance to community welfare.